Commentary on Luke - Sermons 01-11 — page 2 — Cyril of Alexandria

And after this, he again brings forward a second proof, saying, "I indeed baptize you in water: but He shall baptize you in the Holy Ghost and in fire." And this too is of great importance for the proof and demonstration that Jesus is God and Lord. For it is the sole and peculiar property of the Substance That transcends all, to be able to bestow on men the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, and make those that draw near unto It partakers of the divine nature. But this exists in Christ, not as a thing received, nor by communication from another, but as His own, and as belonging to His substance: for "He baptizes in the Holy Ghost." The Word therefore That became man is, as it appears, God, and the fruit of the Father's substance. But to this, it may be, those will object who divide the one Christ into two sons,----those I mean who, as Scripture says, are "animal, and dividers, and having not the Spirit,"----that He Who baptizes in the Holy Ghost is the Word of God, and not He Who is of the seed of David. What answer shall we make, then, to this? Yes! we too affirm, without fear of contradiction, that the Word being God as of His own fulness bestows the Holy Ghost on such as are worthy: but this He still wrought, even when He was made man, as being the One Son with the flesh united to Him in an ineffable and incomprehensible manner. For so the blessed Baptist, after first saying, "I am not worthy to stoop down "and loose the thong 42 of His shoes," immediately added, |40 "He shall baptize you in the Holy Ghost and in fire;" plainly while having feet for shoes. For no one whose mind was awake would say, that the Word, while still incorporeal, and not as yet made like unto us, had feet and shoes, but only when He had become a man. Inasmuch, however, as He did not then cease to be God, He wrought even so works worthy of the Godhead, by giving the Spirit unto them that believe in Him. For He, in one and the same person, was at the same time both God and also man.

But yes, he objects, the Word wrought the works of Deity by means of Him Who is of the seed of David. If so then thou arguest, we will repeat to thee in answer the words of John; for he somewhere said unto the Jews, "There cometh after me a man Who was before me, because He is before me: and I knew Him not, but He That sent me to baptize in water, He said unto me, Upon Whom thou seest the Spirit descending from heaven, and abiding upon Him, This is He That baptizeth in the Holy Ghost: and I saw, and bare witness, that This is the Son of God." Behold, therefore, while plainly calling Him a man, he says that He is prior to him, and was before him, in that He is first, evidently in His divine nature; according to what was plainly said by Himself to the Jewish populace, "Verily I say unto you, before Abraham was, I am."

Next, he says as well, that the Spirit also came down from heaven upon Him. Do they pretend that the Holy Ghost came down upon the Word of God while still abstract and incorporeal? and represent Him Who bestows the Spirit as made partaker of His own Spirit? Or rather is this their meaning, that having received the Spirit in His human nature, He in His divine nature baptizes in the Holy Ghost? For He is Himself singly, and alone, and verily the Son of God the Father, as the blessed Baptist, being taught of God, himself bare witness, saying, "And I saw, and bare witness that This is the Son of God!" 43 |41

Or rather is this their meaning, that having received the Spirit in His human nature, He in His divine nature baptizes in the Holy Ghost? For He is Himself singly, and alone, and verily the Son of God the Father, as the blessed Baptist, being taught of God, himself bare witness, saying, "And I saw, and bare witness that This is the Son of God! " 43 |41

Wouldst thou have also a third proof, in addition to what have already been given? "His fan," he says, "is in His hand, and He shall purge His floor, and gather His wheat into His stores, but the chaff He shall burn with fire unquenchable." For he compares those upon earth to ears of corn, or rather to the threshingfloor and the wheat upon it: for each one of us has grown like an ear of corn. And our Lord once, when speaking to the holy Apostles, made a similar comparison of our state: "The harvest indeed is great: but the labourers are few: pray therefore the Lord of the harvest to send forth labourers into His harvest." We therefore, who are upon the earth, are called ears of corn and wheat, and the harvest. And this harvest belongs to God over all: for He is Lord of all. But behold! says the blessed Baptist, the threshing floor belongs to Christ as its owner; for as such He purges it, removing and separating the chaff from the wheat. For the wheat is the just, whose faith is established and assured: but |42 the chaff signifies those whose mind is weak, and their heart easy to be ensnared, and unsafe and timorous, and blown about by every wind. The wheat, then, he says, is stored up in the granary: is deemed worthy, that is, of safety at God's hand, and mercy, and protection and love: but the chaff, as useless matter, is consumed in the fire.

In every way, therefore, we may perceive that the Word of God, even when He was man, nevertheless continued to be one Son. 44 For He performs those works that belong to Deity, possessing the majesty and glory of the Godhead inseparable from Him. If so we believe, He will crown us with His grace: by Whom and with Whom to God the Father be glory and dominion with the Holy Ghost, for ever and ever, Amen.45 |43

> SERMON XI. The eleventh Sermon of the Commentary upon the Gospel of Luke by the holy Cyril, archbishop of Alexandria, upon the manifestation of our lord.

[From the Syriac MS. 12,165.]

> 3:21-23 46. And it came to pass, that when all the people were baptized, Jesus also was baptized: and as He was praying, the heavens were opened, and the Holy Ghost descended upon Him in bodily form like a dove. And there was a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son; in Thee I am well pleased. And Jesus Himself was beginning to be about thirty years old.

12,165. ]

AGAIN come, that fixing our mind intently upon the Evangelic Scriptures, we may behold the beauty of the truth. Come let us direct the penetrating and accurate eyes of the mind unto the mystery of Christ; let us view with wonder the admirable skill of the divine economy: for so shall we see His glory. And thus to act is for our life: as He Himself assures us, when speaking unto God the Father in heaven, "Those things are life eternal: to know Thee Who alone art true; and Jesus Christ, Whom Thou hast sent." How therefore was He sent? and what was the manner of His coming unto us? For being by nature God That filleth all, how, as the blessed John the Evangelist said, "was He in the world," Himself being Lord? And how was He sent by the Father, when as God He is the Creator and Sustainer of all things? for all things were established by Him.

The wise John the Evangelist then teaches us, saying, "And the Word was made flesh." But perchance some one will say, 'What then? Having ceased to be the Word, did |44 He change into being flesh? Did He fall from His Majesty, having undergone a transformation unto something which previously He was not?' Not so, we say. Far from it. For by nature He is unchangeable and immutable. In saying, therefore, that the Word became flesh, the Evangelist means a man like unto us. For we also are often called flesh ourselves. For it is written, "And all flesh shall see the salvation of God," meaning thereby that every man shall see it. While therefore He immutably retains that "which He was, yet as having under this condition assumed our likeness, He is said to have been made flesh.

Behold Him, therefore, as a man, enduring with us the things that belong to man's estate, and fulfilling all righteousness, for the plan of salvation's sake. And this thou learnest from what the Evangelist says: "And it came to pass that when all the people were baptized, Jesus also was baptized, and prayed." Was He too then in need of holy baptism? But what benefit could accrue to Him from it? The Only-begotten Word of God is Holy of the Holy: so the Seraphim name Him in their praises: so every where the law names Him: and the company of the holy prophets accords with the writings of Moses. What is it that we gain by holy baptism? Plainly the remission of our sins. But in Jesus there was nought of this; "for He did no sin: neither was guile found "in His mouth," as the Scripture saith. "He was holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sins, and made higher than the heavens," according to the words of the divine Paul.

But yes! perchance some one will say, who has been ill instructed in the faith, 'Was it then God the Word that was baptized? Was He in need of being made partaker of the Holy Ghost? Not at all. Therefore it is that we affirm, that the man who was of the seed of David, and united unto Him by conjunction 47, was baptized and received the Spirit.' The |45 Indivisible therefore is divided by you into two sous: and because He was baptized when, thirty years old, He was made holy, as you say, by being baptized. Was He therefore not holy until He arrived at His thirtieth year? Who will assent to you, when thus you corrupt the right and blameless faith? For "there is one Lord Jesus Christ," as it is written. But this we affirm: that He was not separate 48 from Him, and by Himself when baptized and made partaker of the Holy Ghost: for we know, both that He is God, and without stain, and Holy of the Holy: for we confess that "of His fulness have all we received." For the Holy Spirit indeed proceedeth from God the Father, but belongeth also to the Son. It is even often called the Spirit of Christ, though proceeding from God the Father. And to this Paul will testify, saying, at one time, "They that are in the flesh cannot please God: but ye are not in the flesh, but in the spirit, if so be the Spirit of God dwelleth in you. But if any one have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His." And again, "But because ye are sons, God hath sent the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Father, our Father." The Holy Spirit therefore proceedeth indeed as I said from God the Father, but His Only-begotten Word, as being both by nature and verily Son, and resplendent with the Father's dignities, ministereth It to the creation, and bestoweth It on those that are worthy. Yea verily He said, "All things that the Father hath are mine."

" The Holy Spirit therefore proceedeth indeed as I said from God the Father, but His Only-begotten Word, as being both by nature and verily Son, and resplendent with the Father's dignities, ministereth It to the creation, and bestoweth It on those that are worthy. Yea verily He said, "All things that the Father hath are mine. "

But let us retort upon those who pervert the right belief this question; 'How can He Who received the Spirit, if He be, according to your phrase, a man, and the Son separately and by Himself, baptize with the Holy Ghost, and Himself give the Holy Spirit to them who are baptized?' For to be able to impart the Spirit to men suiteth not any one whatsoever of things created, but, together with God's other attributes, is the distinct property of Almighty God alone. But He Who gave It was man: for the wise John said, "After me cometh a Man, Who was before me . . . He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire." As therefore it is unbefitting God the Word, |46 regarded as God the Word, to draw near unto holy baptism, and be made partaker of the Spirit, so in like manner it is altogether incredible, or rather impossible to believe that the ability to baptize men with the Holy Ghost, is the act of a mere man with nothing in Him superior to ourselves.

How then will the mystery be true? In that for our aid He assumed a kind of adaptation 49. The divine Word became man, even "He Who was in the form of God the Father, and thought it not robbery to be equal unto God," as most wise Paul says, "but took the form of a slave, being made in the likeness of men, and humbling Himself to poverty." Enquire therefore Who He was that was first in the likeness of God the Father, and could be regarded as on an equality with Him, but took the form of a slave, and became then a man, and besides this made Himself poor. Was it He of the seed of David, as they argue, Whom they specially regard separately and by Himself as the other Son, distinct from the Word of God the Father? If so, let them shew that He ever was on an equality with the Father. Let them shew how He assumed the form of a slave. Or what shall we say was that form of a slave? And how did He empty Himself? For what is poorer than human nature? He therefore Who is the exact image of God the Father, the likeness, and visible expression of His person, Who shines resplendent in equality unto Him, Who by right of nature is free, and the yoke of Whoso kingdom is put upon all creation,----He it is Who took the form of a slave, that is, became a man, and made Himself poor by consenting to endure these human things, sin only excepted.

But how then, they object, was He baptized, and received also the Spirit? To which we reply, that He had no need of holy baptism, being wholly pure and spotless, and holy of the holy. Nor had He need of the Holy Ghost: for the Spirit That proceedeth from God the Father is of Him, and equal to Him in substance. We must now therefore at length hear what is the explanation of the economy. God in his love to man provided for us a way of salvation and of life. For believing in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and making this confession before many witnesses, we wash away all the filth |47 of sin, and are enriched by the communication of the Holy Spirit, and made partakers of the divine nature, and gain the grace of adoption. It was necessary therefore that the Word of the Father, when He humbled Himself unto emptiness, and deigned to assume our likeness, should become for our sakes the pattern and way of every good work. For it follows, that He Who in every thing is first, must in this also set the example. In order therefore that we may learn both the power itself of holy baptism, and how much we gain by approaching so great a grace, He commences the work Himself; and, having been baptized, prays that you, my beloved, may learn that never-ceasing prayer is a thing most fitting for those who have once been counted worthy of holy baptism.

And the Evangelist says that the heavens were opened, as having long been closed. For Christ said, "Forthwith shall ye see the heavens opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man." For both the flock above and that below being now made one, and one chief Shepherd appointed for all, the heavens were opened, and man upon earth brought near to the holy angels. And the Spirit also again came down as at a second commencement of our race: and upon Christ first, Who received it not so much for His own sake as for ours: for by Him and in Him are we enriched with all things. Most suitably therefore to the economy of grace does He endure with us the things of man's estate: for where otherwise shall we see Him emptied, Whose in His divine nature is the fulness? How became He poor as we are, if He were not conformed to our poverty? How did He empty Himself, if He refused to endure the measure of human littleness?

Having taken therefore Christ as our pattern, let us draw near to the grace of holy baptism, that so we may gain boldness to pray constantly, and lift up holy hands to God the Father, that He may open the heavens also unto us, and send down upon us too the Holy Ghost, to receive us as sons. For He spake unto Christ at the time of holy baptism, as though having by Him and in Him accepted man upon earth to the sonship, "This is My beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased." For He Who is the Son by nature and in truth, and the Only-begotten, when He became like unto us, is specially |48 declared to be the Son of God, not as receiving this for Himself:----for He was and is, as I said, very Son:----but that He might ratify the glory unto us. For He has been made our firstfruits, and firstborn, and second Adam: for which reason it is said, that "in Him all things have become new:" for having put oil the oldness that was in Adam, we have gained the newness that is in Christ: by Whom and with Whom, to God the Father, be glory and dominion with the Holy Ghost, for ever and ever, Amen. 50

----------------------------------------

[Selected footnotes moved to the end and renumbered. Almost all marginalia, any purely textual footnotes, most Greek or Syriac material has been omitted without notice]

----------------------------------------

[Selected footnotes moved to the end and renumbered. Almost all marginalia, any purely textual footnotes, most Greek or Syriac material has been omitted without notice]

1. a There can be little doubt that this passage does not belong to the Commentary, but as I have hitherto been unable to find it in S. Cyril's Collected Works, I have thought it best to retain it. Mai's next extract on v. 32. is from the tenth Book against Julian, Op. VI. 331.; the following on v. 37. is the thirteenth, chapter against the Anthropomorphites, VI. 380.; and the third extract on v. 42. is the Commentary upon Issachar's name, signifying "a reward," in the Glaphyra, I. 227. (Ed. Aub.) All these I have omitted. The remaining extracts, forming a continuous Commentary upon the hymns of the blessed Virgin and Zacharias, I have retained, since it is scarcely probable that S. Cyril entirely passed them over; and, though the homilies, as proved by the Syriac, commenced with the first verse of chap, ii., yet possibly he may have prefaced them by an Exposition of these hymns. Cramer's Catena, nevertheless, contains portions of several of these extracts anonymously. The proof from the Syriac that the homilies began with the second chapter is decisive. Of the nine MSS. in which more or less of this Commentary is preserved, eight constantly mention the number of the homily, which they quote either in part or entire: in one of these, N°. 12, 154., a MS. probably of the eighth century, a series of extracts occurs occupying forty pages, beginning with the first and ending with the hundred and eighteenth homily; and the numbering of this Codex is identical with that of the rest, wherever two or more of them contain the same passage. The Syriac numbering apparently is also identical with that of the Greek. For in my earliest authority, Cod. 12,158, transcribed, as the Copyist states, in the year of our Lord 588., the numbering of the quotations from S.Cyril is still identical with that of the other Codices. This MS. contains a translation of two treatises of Severus of Antioch against Julian, and is probably at least a century anterior to the Syriac version of S. Cyril; so that its agreement with it, both in this and more material points, is of considerable importance. Evidently S. Cyril's Commentary upon the beginning of the Gospel was much more brief than it became subsequently: for whereas the twenty-first homily carries us down to the end of the fifth chapter, those that follow average ten homilies each. In like manner the concluding chapters of St. Luke were passed over by him very rapidly. Finally, as the Syriac, from time to time, does not recognise some of the passages collected by Mai from the Catenae, it is worth notice, that of his four first extracts, not less than three have been discovered in the published works of S.Cyril, incomplete as Aubert's edition is.

2. b Referred by Corderius to Victor.

In like manner the concluding chapters of St. Luke were passed over by him very rapidly. Finally, as the Syriac, from time to time, does not recognise some of the passages collected by Mai from the Catenae, it is worth notice, that of his four first extracts, not less than three have been discovered in the published works of S. Cyril, incomplete as Aubert's edition is. 2. b Referred by Corderius to Victor.

3. c "He means the Arians, who said the Son was indeed God, but nevertheless inferior to the Father: as Eusebius, who was an Arian writer, especially in his interpretation of the 78th Psalm." Mai.----This charge against Eusebius, the late Professor Lee has endeavoured to disprove in the preface to his translation of the Theophania, a Syriac version of which was discovered among the Nitrian MSS. His translation is, however, inaccurate to the last degree; and the treatise in question leaves no doubt that Eusebius was the precursor of Arian doctrines.

4. d Θεὸς καὶ ὑιός, God the Son; as Θεὸς καὶ πατήρ is used by S. Cyril for God the Father. In the more ancient Syriac MSS. the conjunction in these phrases is constantly retained, while in those of a later date the tendency is to omit it.

5. e Mai translates contrary to the Greek "Unigenitius Dei."----S. Cyril's reading Θεός, agrees as usual with the Vatican MS., and is also supported by many of the fathers, and by the Oriental versions.

6. f Eunomius taught, that the Father and Son are unequal, both in degree and kind, whence his followers were called ἀνόμοιοι. He flourished about A. D. 360, and was a disciple of Aetius. St. Athanasius often refers to him in his treatise against the Arians. For a fuller account of him, cf. Newman's Arians, c. iv. sect. 4.

7. g For a very full and accurate discussion of the sense in which our Lord is both μονογενής and πρωτότοκος, the reader may consult S. Cyril's eighth Paschal Homily.

8. h Mai more correctly perhaps reads τῆς ἀνίας κέντρον.

9. i The Peschito has also this reading, though manifestly wrong.

10. k The passage which follows occurs also in MS. 12, 154, with no variae lectiones: as does also the subsequent explanation of Is. viii. 3.

11. l The Syriac translator has here misinterpreted S. Cyril, who does not say that our Lord was free from the emotions natural to bodies, but κινήματος καὶ ῥοπῆς τῆς ἡμᾶς ἀποφερούσης ἐφ̕ ἁ μὴ θέμις, that is, from that corruption of our nature which suggests sin to us, and inclines us to seek it. (James i. 14.) S. Cyril's main argument here is used by him with great force in his treatise De Incarnat. Dom. c. xi., wherein he shews, that our Lord took the flesh holy and perfectly pure, "to convict sin of injustice, and to destroy the power of death. For as long as sin sentenced only the guilty to death, no interference with it was possible, seeing that it had justice on its side. But when it subjected to the same punishment Him Who was innocent, and guiltless, and worthy of crowns of honour and hymns of praise, being convicted of injustice, it was by necessary consequence stripped of its power."

For as long as sin sentenced only the guilty to death, no interference with it was possible, seeing that it had justice on its side. But when it subjected to the same punishment Him Who was innocent, and guiltless, and worthy of crowns of honour and hymns of praise, being convicted of injustice, it was by necessary consequence stripped of its power. "

12. m This reading is supported by several MSS., two Scholia, and S. Augustine; but is rejected by St. Paul, Heb. i. 6.

13. n Mai reads ἡ ἀλήθεια, 'the reality.'

14. o The Fathers constantly refer this name, Maher-shalal-hash-baz, to our Lord, and explain it of the overthrow of Satan. Another instance of S. Cyril's use of it will be found in his 17th Paschal Homily, as follows: The prophetess is the holy Virgin: and the name given to the child suiteth not man, but God: for, saith He, call His name. Spoil quickly: hastily plunder. For at His birth the heavenly and supernatural infant, while yet in swaddling bands and on His mother's bosom, because of His human nature, stripped forthwith Satan of his goods by His ineffable might as God: for the Magi came from the East to worship Him, &c.

15. p Several passages referred by Mai to this homily are not found in the Syriac, as was to be expected, the Catenists having made use not only of the Commentary, but also of S. Cyril's other works, especially the Julian books, besides the possibility of interpolations, and passages erroneously ascribed to him. The first omitted extract from B. is to shew that the shepherds typified the pastors of the Church, as also Christ the chief shepherd, Who came to seek the lost flock: while Bethlehem, the house of bread, His birthplace, is the Church, "where daily the mystical bread of life is sacrificed." The second passage (from what MS. is uncertain) gives a physical interpretation of the butter which the Emmanuel ate, unworthy of Cyril, and at variance with the spiritual interpretation of the prophecy given above. Thirdly, there are a series of extracts from I. taken chiefly from the Commentary on Isaiah. Conf. Vol. II. 134. 200. (Ed. Aub.) And, lastly, an extract from B., to the effect that probably it was an archangel who brought the message, accompanied by his usual attendants. The first passage is remarkable, both as speaking of a daily communion, and for its application of the word ἱερουργεῖται to the "mystical bread of life." The Fathers generally use this word in the same manner as St. Paul, Rom. xv. 16., for the discharge of any religious duty, and in this sense it will be found to occur more than once in the course of the Commentary. Other examples may be seen in Suicer's Thesaurus under ἱερουργέω, and the only instance he gives of its application to the Lord's supper is from Zonaras, a writer of the twelfth century. It occurs, however, in Philostorgii Hist. Eccl. ix. 4., and is there referred by Valesius to the Lord's supper, but this interpretation is far from certain. For the historian is speaking of the heretic Eunomius, who, he says, retired to a small estate situated on the seashore near Chalcedon, οὐδὲ ἱερουργίας ἐξ οὗ τῆς Κυζίκου μετέστη οὐ μὲν οὖν ἐς ὅσον ἐνεβίω χρόνον ἥψατο. This Valesius translates by "ne saera quidem mysteria unquam celebravit;" but it rather means, that "he entirely abstained from all the duties of his sacred office." In support of his rendering Valesius quotes from Eusebius' Life of Constantine, Lib. IV. ... where, however, as Wernsdorf shews, by a comparison with other passages of Eusebius, that historian, in his usual rhetorical style, thus described the prayers for the safety of the Emperor, and the Church militant, which, as in our service, preceded the celebration of the Eucharist. The probability, therefore, is, that this extract is incorrectly referred to S. Cyril.

16. q The original Greek of both the third and fourth Sermons has been preserved in the Imperial Library at Paris; and that of the fourth only at Trinity College, Cambridge. The former has been printed by Aubert in his collected edition of S. Cyril's Works, Vol. V. part ii. p. 385., where the two Sermons are incorporated into one.

17. r From this it appears that these homilies were delivered extemporaneously, which accounts for a certain amount of repetition in them, especially of favorite texts.

18. s The feast of circumcision.

19. t I have not noticed the many verbal discrepancies between him and Aubert, as the Catenists naturally had to make many slight alterations in forming their extracts into a connected discourse.

20. u This passage, as far as "the plan of salvation," Mai for the present omits, but afterwards gives it in so different a form, and with such additions, that I think it better to append a separate translation. "Again He paid the half shekel to the collectors of the tribute, although not bound to pay, as being in very truth the Son: but He paid as being made under the law. For He must verily act fully according to the dispensation which He had undertaken for our sakes. And we shall find Him, moreover, even in the payment of the half shekel marked out as a Saviour and Redeemer (?). For the half shekel was a coin stamped with the royal image: and it was paid according to the law for two persons. Behold therefore again Christ represented in the half shekel. For being the image of the Father, the impress of His substance, the coin that came from heaven, He offered Himself as the ransom for the two people, the Jews, I mean, and the Gentiles." This fanciful style of interpretation seldom appears in the Syriac, and is equally rejected in the present case by Aubert's MS.

21. v This passage exists among the Syriac fragments, and is important in so far establishing the accuracy of Aubert's text, as it agrees with it in omitting an interpolation of the Catenist, found in Mai.

22. x So Justin Martyr's Dial. with Trypho. (p. 201. ed. F. Sylburgii, Heidelb. 1793.) "The ordinance of circumcision, which commanded infants to be circumcised on the eighth day only, was a type of the true circumcision from error and wickedness by means of the resurrection from the dead of our Lord Jesus Christ on the first day of the week. For the first day of the week, while remaining the first of all the days, is, nevertheless, in its relation to the whole circle of the week, called the eighth, and yet continues to be the first." So again, p. 288. "The ark, in which were eight persons, symbolizes by that number the eighth day, on which Christ arose from the dead."

For the first day of the week, while remaining the first of all the days, is, nevertheless, in its relation to the whole circle of the week, called the eighth, and yet continues to be the first. " So again, p. 288. "The ark, in which were eight persons, symbolizes by that number the eighth day, on which Christ arose from the dead. "

23. y The next two or three paragraphs are not found in Aubert, but as they are in Mai's same MS. E, which contains most of the foregoing, and as it is possible that the Copyist of Aubert's MS. in reducing two Sermons into one, made large omissions to avoid the too great length, I have received them into the text.

24. z Mai's next extract is from the 15th book of the De Ador. Spir. l. 553 and is omitted.

25. a Aubert begins again here. The passage is also in the Aurea Catena, upon Luke ii. 24.

26. b A passage follows in Mai, either from E. or H., going over ground already traversed, and probably only a summary gathered from S. Cyril. It is valuable, nevertheless, as shewing how little idea the ancients had of the immaculate conception of the blessed Virgin Mary: for it testifies that all women, except the Virgin, (αἱ ἄλλαι γυναῖκες,) conceived in sin, (ἐν ἀνομίαις.)

27. c The text is now taken from the Tr. Coll. MS. B. Q. 7. apparently of the 12th century. It is a volume of sermons, and among them has one with the following superscription: Κυρίλλου ἀρχεπισκπ. ἀλεξανδρείας, εἰς τὸν δίκαιον συμεὼν, καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἑρμηνείας τοῦ κατὰ λουκᾶν εὐαγγελίου· κε̃ εὐλο +

I owe my transcript to a friend, himself engaged in collecting and editing the Greek remains of this Father.

28. d Mai, whose extracts begin again at this clause, has admitted at the end of the first sentence an interpolation so curious, that I append it: "... and offered what is appointed in the law, a pair of turtles and two young pigeons, the type of temperance and gentleness, as well as also of each kind of life, marriage, namely, and celibacy, of both of which He is the Law-giver. For you may say that the active and more spiritual, who have taken upon themselves the single life, are the pigeons: but that those who occupy themselves with a family and other domestic cares are the turtle doves." As in the unworthy interpretation of the butter, referred to in the note at the end of the 2nd Sermon, it is impossible to say which MS. contains this interpolation, as the letters put by Mai at the commencement of each extract merely mean that those MSS. severally contain more or less of what follows. Immediately afterwards he has another passage, the false philosophy and bad Greek of which confirm its rejection by the two trustworthy MSS. It is to the effect, that Symeon was to be set free from the leaping-ground of life: for life is a ransom and prison. Upon the offering of the turtle doves, the reader may compare S. Cyril's explanation in the De Ador. Spir. Ed. Aub. I. 531. which agrees with the present Commentary.

29. Also in the Syriac. MS. 12,154.

It is to the effect, that Symeon was to be set free from the leaping-ground of life: for life is a ransom and prison. Upon the offering of the turtle doves, the reader may compare S. Cyril's explanation in the De Ador. Spir. Ed. Aub. I. 531. which agrees with the present Commentary. 29. Also in the Syriac. MS. 12,154.

30. g The doxology is taken from Aubert, and is identically the same with that which concludes every homily in the Syriac.

31. h Mai does not contain the above explanation of the sword that was to pierce the holy Virgin, but in its place has the following adaptation of it: "But to speak more briefly, we affirm that the sword here signifies the temptation like a knife, or even the passion itself brought upon the Immanuel by the madness of the Jews. And so the just Symeon seems to understand, and even to say. For the holy Virgin was all but killed by a sword in seeing Him That was born of her in the flesh crucified. Such also was that said by Zechariah (xiii. 7.): Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd, that is, forthwith let the saving passion be enacted, and let the time of the shewing forth of good things come.To this Mai appends the following note: In codice B. f. 31. post σάρκα αδδιτυρ, καὶ ἀμφιγνοοῦσα εἴ γε καὶ θανάτου κρατήσει θανατωθείς: quam particulam de B. Virginis dubitatione circa futuram filii sui resurrectionem cum nec ceteri codices in Cyrillo habeant, nec pietas Christiana admittat, haud immerito praetermisimus: quamquam eadem legitur sub finem predictae homiliae in hypapantem," &c. The danger of such a method of treating MS. authority is shewn by the additional authority of the Tr. Cod., which completely agrees with Aubert, some slight verbal differences excepted.

32. From the Syriac: Ms. 12,151.

33. i That is, "the human soul:" for our Lord, being perfect man, had a human soul as well as a fleshly body, as we are taught in the Athanasian Creed, in opposition to the Apollinarian heresy "Of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting." And this human soul was capable of increasing in wisdom. This extract apparently is collected from what precedes.

34. l The style of the short extract that follows is entirely unlike Cyril's. Mai says, that the Catenae ascribe it to Origen as well as Cyril.

" And this human soul was capable of increasing in wisdom. This extract apparently is collected from what precedes. 34. l The style of the short extract that follows is entirely unlike Cyril's. Mai says, that the Catenae ascribe it to Origen as well as Cyril.

35. m Mai's next extract upon v. 52. may serve as an instance of the manner in which the Catenists joined with the utmost neatness passages from various works. It commences with S. Cyril's Commentary on John i. 14, Op. iv. 96: after which there follow a few lines, which may possibly be from the Commentary on Luke: and finally, we have the 28th assertion of the Thesaurus, Op. v. pt. i. 253. The doctrine of these extracts is nearly identical, all affirming that our Lord's increase in wisdom and stature and grace cannot be said of Him considered as the Word, but either must be understood of the increase of admiration on the part of all who beheld Him, and daily witnessed a fuller manifestation of His glory: or, as the two latter extracts teach, it refers to the human nature. As I have not been able to find the second extract in S. Cyril's collected works,, I give it entire: "And observe, that that which increases in any thing is different from that in which it is said to increase. If therefore He is said to increase in wisdom, it was not the wisdom that increased, but the human nature that increased in it. For as the Godhead day by day unveiled and manifested Itself in Him, He ever became an object of greater admiration to those that saw Him."

36. n This fragment is referred by two of Mai's MSS. to Chrysostom as well as Cyril, and by Corderius to Cyril and Basil.

37. o The name Joshua, as a corruption of the Jews, (certainly after the time of Josephus, but prior to Jerome, who once mentions it; cf. Com. in Os. I. 1.,) ought to be everywhere rejected; but the ΝΑΓΗ of the LXX. is an error of the copyists for ΝΑΓΝ. The Masorites have twice punctuated the name correctly in the case of Jeshua, the son of Jozadak. (Ez. ii. 2., iii. 2.)

38. p The style of this comment, so unlike Cyril's, and the extraordinary conclusion, both suggest caution in attributing to him the latter part of this extract.

39. q The next extract is from the Commentary on Isaiah, Op. ii. 506, and is therefore omitted.

40. r S. Cyril, whose habit it is to dwell at great length upon practical subjects, as will be seen afterwards in the Sermons from the Syriac, has exhausted two homilies upon John Baptist's lessons; but as they contained no doctrinal statements, nothing has been preserved in the Syriac, and by the Catenists only one extract: and even this in Cramer is referred to Origen.

ii. 506, and is therefore omitted. 40. r S. Cyril, whose habit it is to dwell at great length upon practical subjects, as will be seen afterwards in the Sermons from the Syriac, has exhausted two homilies upon John Baptist's lessons; but as they contained no doctrinal statements, nothing has been preserved in the Syriac, and by the Catenists only one extract: and even this in Cramer is referred to Origen.

41. s Although the preposition ἐν is occasionally used for the instrument or means, yet this is only admissible where the sense can still be traced back to its proper signification of local presence. And so here: "to baptize," is literally in Syriac "to make to stand," by a metaphor evidently drawn from what was actually the practice of John and the early Church: and "to be baptized" is the simple verb "to stand." Thus v. 21. is literally; "And it came to pass, when all the people stood, that Jesus also stood." And so the passage above is exactly; "I indeed make you to stand in "water;" "He shall make you to stand in the Holy Ghost," &c. And I have therefore in the translation retained "in," as most closely representing the Syriac.

42. t The Catenist in Mai has inserted in a parenthesis a curious observation, namely, that by the σφαιρωτήρ is meant "the tip of the shoe, ending in a point, such as the barbarians wear." The word, however, used by the Evangelist is ἱμάς simply a "thong:" and there can be no doubt that in the Septuagint, whence Cyril's word is taken, Gen. xiv. 23, the right reading is σφυρωτήρ, "a thong for the ankles," whereas σφαιρωτήρ, from σφαῖρα, "a ball," is the word for the pomegranates, used in the adorning of the golden candlestick. (Ex. xxv.31.)

" The word, however, used by the Evangelist is ἱμάς simply a "thong:" and there can be no doubt that in the Septuagint, whence Cyril's word is taken, Gen. xiv. 23, the right reading is σφυρωτήρ, "a thong for the ankles," whereas σφαιρωτήρ, from σφαῖρα, "a ball," is the word for the pomegranates, used in the adorning of the golden candlestick. (Ex. xxv. 31. )

43. v In the above defence of catholic doctrine against the heresies of Nestorius, S. Cyril must be taken as meaning, that the natural result of Nestorius' teaching is to divide the one Christ into two sons, and not that he expressly so taught. For in his seventeenth quaternion he says, "God the Word, even before the incarnation, was Son, and God, and coexistent with the Father: but in these last times assumed the form of the slave. But while, before He was Son, and so called; after the assumption of the flesh, He cannot be called Son separately, lest we should infer two Sons." The doctrine of Nestorius, as briefly sketched by the Council of Ephesus, was, that "He Who for our sakes became man, must not be called God." Hence his objection to the title θεοτόκος applied to the Virgin, and so valued by the fathers as expressing the inseparable union of the Divine and human natures in the one person of Christ. Hence his protest against worshipping Christ absolutely. (Quat. xvi.): and such expressions as, [Greek] (Quat. XV. Conf. Harduin. Concil. I. 1414, 1442.) In drawing these subtle conclusions, Nestorius (Ep. ad Cyrillum Hard. Conc. I, 1281.) also made that distinction between the Son of David and God the Word, so often attacked by Cyril in this Commentary: "God the Word, he says, was not the Son of David;" and as Cyril would fairly judge of his doctrine by this letter addressed to himself, no wonder he attributes to him, both here and elsewhere, a conclusion which follows apparently so directly from these words. In his seventeenth quaternion occurs probably Nestorius' most exact; statement, and from it equally S. Cyril would draw this conclusion, [Greek].

44. u In these words S. Cyril most accurately sums up the Catholic doctrine of the inseparable union of the two natures in Christ; which union Nestorius denied, anathematizing all who said that the Emmanuel was very God, and teaching instead that the Emmanuel was God indwelling in our nature. Si quis Eum Qui est Emmanuel, Deum verum esse dixerit, et non potius nobiscum Deum; hoc est, inhabitasse earn quae secundum nosmet est naturam, per id quod unitus est nostrae, quam de Maria Virgine suscepit; anathema sit. (An. I. Hard. Con. I. 1298.) To which it might well be replied, that the Emmanuel is "God with us," God and man, not God in man. A similar doctrine is contained in his fifteenth quaternion, as quoted above.

(An. I. Hard. Con. I. 1298. ) To which it might well be replied, that the Emmanuel is "God with us," God and man, not God in man. A similar doctrine is contained in his fifteenth quaternion, as quoted above.

45. x The most important passages in the above homily have been preserved by the Catenists, but with the connection and course of the argument more than once broken. They ascribe, however, to S. Cyril, two short passages at the end (cf. Mai, p. 146.) not belonging to the Commentary; and there are some slight verbal differences in the intervening extract. On the other hand, two passages, preserved by-Thomas Aquinas, are both contained in the Syriac.

46. y It is to be observed, that S. Cyril often omits several verses in his Commentary. In one of Mai's MSS. some one has written the following anonymous note upon the omission here of vv. 18-20.: ὁ μακάριος Κύριλλος τοῦ Ἡρώδου ἐν τῇ ἑμηνείᾳ οὐκ ἐπεμνήσθη: and proceeds to give a reason for it.

47. z By [Syriac] I imagine the translator means Nestorius' favourite word συνάφεια, as he uses it for instance in his xviith quaternion: "Therefore is it, with respect, namely, to the dignity of the Sonship, that God the Word is also called Christ, inasmuch as He has a perpetual conjunction with the Christ."----Hard. Con. I. 1414. Conf. also note in page 41.

48. a This refers to the doctrine of Nestorius, that He Who was baptized was the man Christ, regarded in His human nature, and distinguished from God the Word.

49. b Economy.

50. c As frequently is the case, the short extracts in Mai at the end are not found in the Syriac, probably either from being taken from S. Cyril's other works, or erroneously ascribed to him. The first (from B.) contradicts the doctrine maintained throughout this Commentary, viz. that our Lord submitted to baptism as the pattern and type of humanity, and refers His baptism to His human nature. But Christ's human nature needed no baptism, as having no stain of sin. The second (from E. and F.) is a refutation of Paul of Samosata, drawn from the Evangelist's words, that "Jesus was be-ginning to be about thirty years old," and shewing that though He had a beginning as man, as God He had no beginning. And the last is a reproof addressed to those who justified the delay of holy baptism by our Lord's example, and which being referred to S. Cyril by four MSS. (A. E. F. H.), as well as for its own sake, I append entire; 'Thus great and beyond expectation is the harm that is done by deferring the grace that is by baptism for a long and unseasonable time: chiefly because no one can look forward with certainty to the accomplishment of his plans, and also because, though his purpose arrive at its fulfilment, he is sanctified indeed, but receives only the forgiveness of his past transgressions, while his talent he brings back to his Lord bare, having had no time to gain by trading any thing to add thereunto.'

----------------------------------------